February 1994 LSAT Section 4 Question 9

There is relatively little room for growth in the overall carpet market, which is tied to the size of the population....

Williamg on August 12, 2022

Why not B?

Doesn't B exemplify dominant firms increasing their market share through aggressive marketing, thus directly contradicting the conclusion?

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Raheel on July 10 at 07:44PM

Why not C either?

Emil-Kunkin on July 20 at 02:55PM

I think b shows the opposite. It shows the market is saturated, and that there's no room to aggressively position and market a new product.

I'm not sure how c would matter. The outcome variable the author cares about is market share, not profitability.